The Australian Civ Group: the Hydey where are you? Memorial thread

[deity]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Why do you like rules controversies? You seem to be trying really hard to escalate this one for reasons that escape me.

errr, clarity?

[deity]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
diplo guiding is fine with me

alliances with the 4 players in this game doesn't make a lot of sense because finbar doesn't like to fight and I already have warfare with one player, so it would be 2 against 1 if trev or I formed an alliance with you. But I'll leave that to your sense of fair play.

LOL, so no alliances because finbar is a peace-monger!

And sense of fair play is a sneak attack on Trev's civ in early games stages that nearly wipes him out! .... go figure...

[deity]

And while we are talking about senses, keep ones sense of humour!

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by deity

And sense of fair play is a sneak attack on Trev's civ in early games stages that nearly wipes him out! .... go figure...

Er no - early in the game I put units next to both his capital and another early city in the same turn and found them both undefended but passed up the opportunity to wipe him out.

Trev repaid my kindness by building a city on land I was claiming even after I asked him nicely not to and even gently reminded him of how I'd let him live earlier in the game. It was thus clear he was going to be expansionist at my expense so I attacked him. The war is a territorial dispute.

The irony of this is you've put pike on my land to protect the very city, Rymney, which started the war.

[finbar]

Originally posted by deity


no alliances because finbar is a peace-monger!

Only by default. I couldn't be f*cked working out a battle strategy. I don't have the concentration span.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by finbar


Only by default. I couldn't be f*cked working out a battle strategy. I don't have the concentration span.

So how does that make you different from the average general? Were you in charge of the Dardanelles campaign? You seem to be paraphrasing the relevant British general

[deity]

OK, so we have clear rules of no city or unit bribe.

All else is OK and is down to individual judgement. Fair enough. I can live with that.

[deity]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
The irony of this is you've put pike on my land to protect the very city, Rymney, which started the war.

I don't want Horse Heathens ransacking my best trading city...

[deity]

I think given the state of Horse war-mongering it's time the world stood up for itself...

[Alexander's Horse]

warmongering? I built most of my cities. I'm a relatively peaceful builder

I dare say the player sneaking off with the game is finbar.

So lets keep bickering eh?

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by deity
BTW, we must start with the current save or I'll chuck a wobbly about losing rush buys.

I have a save on my turn, would you lose rush buys if we used that?

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by deity


I don't want Horse Heathens ransacking my best trading city...

Priceless intelligence, ta

[deity]

I knew that when I mentioned it in KC earlier on.... but thought the open rationalisation was important - to be fair

[Alexander's Horse]

why would your trade depend so much on one city?

I was toying with the idea of leaving Rymney with trev since he wanted it so badly

[finbar]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
why would your trade depend so much on one city?

Because it's only a paddle across the channel for him and Trev's few other remaining cities are probably ringed by your troops, thus inaccessible.